Supreme Court Sides With Biden Administration in Social Media Case
- 2 days ago
Supreme Court Sides
With Biden Administration , in Social Media Case.
Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, .
Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, .
previously brought a lawsuit against the government, alleging that it had influenced what social media companies allow on their sites.
In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation.
In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation.
On July 4, 2023, Louisiana Judge Terry Doughty
agreed with the plaintiffs and restricted members of the Biden administration from interacting with social media companies in an attempt to moderate their content.
The U.S. Supreme Court struck
down the lower court's ruling by a vote of
6-3 on June 26, 'The Guardian' reports. .
The plaintiffs, without any
concrete link between their injuries
and the defendants’ conduct, , Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
... ask us to conduct a review of the
years-long communications between dozens
of federal officials, across different agencies,
with different social-media platforms,
about different topics, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
This court’s standing doctrine
prevents us from ‘exercis[ing such]
general legal oversight’ of the
other branches of government, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
Ultimately, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the lower court "glossed over complexities in the evidence" and
"also erred by treating the defendants, plaintiffs
and platforms each as a unified whole.".
Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas
and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas
and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
For months, high-ranking government officials
placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to
suppress Americans’ free speech, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion.
The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus
permits the successful campaign of coercion in
this case to stand as an attractive model for
future officials who want to control what
the people say, hear, and think, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion
With Biden Administration , in Social Media Case.
Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, .
Attorneys general in Louisiana and Missouri, and other right-wing individuals, .
previously brought a lawsuit against the government, alleging that it had influenced what social media companies allow on their sites.
In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation.
In particular, plaintiffs in the case of Murthy v. Missouri questioned whether the Biden administration violated free speech protections amid the pandemic when social networks were instructed to remove COVID misinformation.
On July 4, 2023, Louisiana Judge Terry Doughty
agreed with the plaintiffs and restricted members of the Biden administration from interacting with social media companies in an attempt to moderate their content.
The U.S. Supreme Court struck
down the lower court's ruling by a vote of
6-3 on June 26, 'The Guardian' reports. .
The plaintiffs, without any
concrete link between their injuries
and the defendants’ conduct, , Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
... ask us to conduct a review of the
years-long communications between dozens
of federal officials, across different agencies,
with different social-media platforms,
about different topics, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
This court’s standing doctrine
prevents us from ‘exercis[ing such]
general legal oversight’ of the
other branches of government, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, via majority opinion.
Ultimately, Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote that the lower court "glossed over complexities in the evidence" and
"also erred by treating the defendants, plaintiffs
and platforms each as a unified whole.".
Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas
and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas
and Neil Gorsuch dissented.
For months, high-ranking government officials
placed unrelenting pressure on Facebook to
suppress Americans’ free speech, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion.
The Court, however, shirks that duty and thus
permits the successful campaign of coercion in
this case to stand as an attractive model for
future officials who want to control what
the people say, hear, and think, Justice Samuel Alito, via dissenting opinion